On 7/15/15 9:28 PM, jyaven...@mozilla.com wrote:
I need to complete bug 886194 then (that add MSE supports).
Yes, or at least rename the subject slightly. ;)
PS: We have the same first name in different language. awesome.
Hey, that's rare for us!
.: Jan-Ivar :.
Hello,
(mostly for people of DOM and CSS)
tl;dr: A list of unprefixed properties where the prefixed version has been
dropped.
Context:
A feature has 4 states (or at least my impression):
1. No support
2. prefixed only support (MozFoo and -moz-bar)
3. prefixed and unprefixed support (MozFoo,
Hi
Am 16.07.2015 um 00:47 schrieb Jeff Gilbert:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Thomas Zimmermann
tzimmerm...@mozilla.com mailto:tzimmerm...@mozilla.com wrote:
The discussion has a number of good points in favor of using 'a',
but I
missed convincing arguments in favor of not
On 7/15/15 3:42 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
This means it will support get/set of: MediaStream objects.
This means it will throw TypeError on set of: MediaSource objects, Blob
objects, and File objects, for now.
Jan-Ivar,
Do you happen to know whether other UAs support this unprefixed and
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey j...@mozilla.com wrote:
This means it will throw TypeError on set of: MediaSource objects, Blob
objects, and File objects, for now.
For what it's worth, I think implementing Blob/File support would be
quite trivial. Just make
elem.srcObject =
On 07/15/2015 10:42 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
Hi,
We intend to un-prefix HTMLMediaElement.srcObject (it currently exists as
HTMLMediaElement.mozSrcObject), even though it only supports a subset of the
types mandated in the spec. [1]
It is a bit unfortunate to expose the property without
On Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 5:42:39 AM UTC+10, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey wrote:
Hi,
We intend to un-prefix HTMLMediaElement.srcObject (it currently exists
as HTMLMediaElement.mozSrcObject), even though it only supports a subset
of the types mandated in the spec. [1]
This means it will support
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 8:15 AM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
1. Enhance browser tiles: many sites have nice logos/icons, and they have an
application-name. I want to show the application-name and icon or logo them
in tiles in the new tab page.
This seems possible using meta
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:00 PM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
Some of the things raised:
* It's not clear what problems manifest solves: do we really want to
replicate native app installation behavior on the Web? We don't have a good
history of making this work in various products.
*
On 15 July 2015 at 10:42, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
But it'd be *really* nice to get rid of features that are there
specifically to migrate users away from the web and to native Android
and iOS apps. If google/apple wants to implement that then that's fine
with me, it's their
On 15 July 2015 at 10:42, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
I also think that display-mode and orientation (and maybe
theme_color) properties seem to make much less sense given the
current model of manifests. That seems like information that we'd want
to apply during normal browsing too,
The Web API documentation community meeting, with representatives from
the technical evangelism and the API development teams, will take place
on Thursday at 8 AM Pacific Time (see http://bit.ly/1GghwBR for your
time zone).
Typical meetings include news about recent API development progress and
Hi,
We intend to un-prefix HTMLMediaElement.srcObject (it currently exists
as HTMLMediaElement.mozSrcObject), even though it only supports a subset
of the types mandated in the spec. [1]
This means it will support get/set of: MediaStream objects.
This means it will throw TypeError on set
For the e10s talos regressions see
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1174776 and
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1184277. We've already
diagnose one source of the regression to be a difference with GC/CC
behavior when running e10s talos.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:44 PM,
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:12 AM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
some people believe that web applications should be installable
I don't subscribe to that theory. The web is comprised of pages, not
apps. (I mostly agree with Alex, but not regarding the perceived need
for app discoverability; I hear
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Nicholas Nethercote n.netherc...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:06 PM, Bobby Holley bobbyhol...@gmail.com
wrote:
I'm not wild about this idea.
It's such a boil-the-ocean solution I honestly thought bsmedberg was
joking at first...
Well
The public source code for Firefox has existed for 17+ years (since ~April
1998). We can only assume it will be around for another 10+ years.
I believe you have to take the long view on the cost benefit analysis and
realize that a lot of pain in the short term (e.g. switching styles
entirely)
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 4:54 AM, Martin Thomson m...@mozilla.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:12 AM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
some people believe that web applications should be installable
I don't subscribe to that theory. The web is comprised of pages, not
apps. (I mostly agree
On 7/15/2015 5:47 PM, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
Would it be crazy for us to resort to a poll on these things?
A poll will not be useful for informing this decision.
--BDS
___
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
Hooray!
Rob
--
lbir ye,ea yer.tnietoehr rdn rdsme,anea lurpr edna e hnysnenh hhe uresyf
toD
selthor stor edna siewaoeodm or v sstvr esBa kbvted,t
rdsme,aoreseoouoto
o l euetiuruewFa kbn e hnystoivateweh uresyf tulsa rehr rdm or rnea
lurpr
.a war hsrer holsa rodvted,t nenh
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Gregory Szorc g...@mozilla.com wrote:
The public source code for Firefox has existed for 17+ years (since ~April
1998). We can only assume it will be around for another 10+ years.
I believe you have to take the long view on the cost benefit analysis and
Would it be crazy for us to resort to a poll on these things? I propose
abusing the mozillans.org skills field in profiles.
For example, I have created the following sets of skills on
mozillians.org by question, and which should autocomplete if you go to
the edit page for your profile at
On Wednesday, July 15, 2015 at 3:34:42 PM UTC+10, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 12:00 AM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
* It's not clear what problems manifest solves
This is by far the biggest problem. I think we ended up with manifests
because packages have manifests and
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:12 PM, mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
Do we even agree on the above?
I agree with some of it... But, I don't really see the point of trying
to merge web and native (other than turning the browser into the OS).
And I really don't see the point of trying to play by native's
Yes, please!
On 2015-07-14 3:22 PM, nsm.nik...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Target release: Firefox 42
Implementation and shipping bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=1114554
Specification: https://notifications.spec.whatwg.org/#service-worker-api
This is a follow up to the
25 matches
Mail list logo
